(1) SPECIAL leave is granted. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2) THE respondent who was the Head Constable in the Police Force of the appellant, State of Punjab, was prematurely retired in accordance with the rules. He challenged the same by filing a suit out of which the present appeal arises, making inter alia allegations of mala fides on the part of two senior Superintendents of Police, Mr S.S. Bains and Mr Bua Singh. It was also pleaded by the respondent that his services were good throughout and there was no material whatsoever on the basis of which a decision for his early retirement could have been taken. The trial court decreed the suit. The State appealed and the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, who heard the appeal, while observing that the defendant- State had failed to produce relevant materials in support of its denial of the plaint allegations, allowed the State to produce the relevant records for examination by the court. This was not done within the permitted time. The appellate court, then, proceeded to dispose of the appeal on the basis of the evidence already on the records. The court agreed with the conclusion of the trial court and affirmed the decree. The second ap- peal filed by the appellant-State was dismissed by the High court in limine without assigning any reason.

(3) IT has been contended that the police officers against whom the allegations of lack of bona tides were made should have been impleaded as defendants, so that they could have rebutted the allegations. It is also stated that the time allowed by the first appellate court for producing the records was, having regard to the circumstances prevailing in the State, inadequate.

(4) WE have considered the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent and all the relevant circumstances in the case, and we agree with the State that the senior police officers ought to have been im- pleaded as parties to the suit. Besides, pleading their case in reply to the plaint allegations against them for the purpose of supporting the order of the retirement of the respondent, they could have vindicated their acts performed in their official capacity. They run the risk of being prejudiced in their careers by the adverse observations in the impugned judgments made against them without affording an opportunity to defend them- selves. We, therefore, hold that they should be added as defendants in the suit and allowed to file written statements and support their plea by evidence.

(5) ACCORDINGLY, the order of the High court and the decision of the first appellate court are set aside and the case is remitted to the first ap- pellate court for fresh decision in accordance with law. Mr S.S. Bains and Mr Bua Singh shall be added as party-defendants in the plaint and al- lowed to file their written statements and produce evidence. The appellant-State also shall be permitted to produce the relevan. records and the respondent will get an opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal. Since the case is an old one, it will be highly desirable for the learned Ad- ditional District Judge to take up the appeal expeditiously and dispose it of as soon as may be practically possible. This appeal is accordingly al- lowed, but in the circumstances without costs.